07 Nov 08
Originally posted by Tsekos the punkTo answer the original question, I believe that any woman can be as good as any man. In other words, I don't believe there are any impediments inherent to their gender that would prevent them from doing so.
Do you think that women can make as good chess players as men?
What's your opinion?
Having said that, I do believe that there are cultural factors that make it more difficult for women to achieve at the highest level.
07 Nov 08
1 edit
Originally posted by EladarYes, you're right. We cannot draw any gender specific conclusion of the facts mentionned. Silly me. Sorry.
It means that I'm a low rated player for a man. Compare apples with apples.
The original question is interesting in another aspect:
In muscle intensive sports there is humhum for men, and humhum for women. Why? The difference of muscle mass of gender reason. But still, there are lots of women that are stronger than me so why can I not compete among the women? (Yes, I know, who to shower with after the competition. 😵 ) So individually there is no reason to compete in different classes, but in general, statistically men are strongr than women.
What about brain specific 'sports'? Why do we have women classes and mens classes? And why can any women cmpete in mens class but not reversed? Is it so that women have lesser brain force than men? In bridge there are no classes, there all compete on the same condition. Poker? The same. I say that women and men can compete in chess with the same conditions. Or we have to accept that women are inferior in brain assisted sports?
When I say to a women that "For being a woman you are quite good!" And rarely she takes this as a compliment.
Originally posted by FabianFnasAgain Fabian sprinkles us with bad examples to try to prove his point.
Yes, you're right. We cannot draw any gender specific conclusion of the facts mentionned. Silly me. Sorry.
The original question is interesting in another aspect:
In muscle intensive sports there is humhum for men, and humhum for women. Why? The difference of muscle mass of gender reason. But still, there are lots of women that are stronger than me men that "For being a woman you are quite good!" And rarely she takes this as a compliment.
The question isn't (and has never been) if women are inferior in "brain assisted sports" (btw, if there's one where the brain doesn't assist, please let me know). That would only follow if ALL "brain assisted sports" used THE SAME brain functions. Which they don't.
So the question is simply, is the female brain more, less or equally adapted for success in the game of chess? The differences between male and female brain are well-documented. Does the analysis of these differences serve as evidence for any of the three cases mentioned above?
These are the questions that matter to the issue at hand, not some politically correct comments like the ones you've been making.
Regarding the issue of whether competitions should be separate or not, I would be in favour of them not being separate. This because even if there is a natural advantage for one of the sexes, there is no guarantee that the randomness of nature won't provide a champion from the disadvantaged one. So even if males (or females) were shown to be less adapted to the game of chess, I would still prefer that the categories were not separate.
07 Nov 08
Originally posted by FabianFnasActually, no. While there is no reason why a woman can't become world champion, it's a fact that there are not as many brilliant women as there are men, so men are more likely to be great chess players, which agrees with empirical data. Men are also more likely than women to be really stupid, but that doesn't affect chess. (for "proof", visit Wikipedia)
Do you think that women can make as good chess players as men?
Do you think that muslems can make as good chess players as christians?
Do you think that blackswomen can make as good chess players as whites?
Do you think that blondes can make as good chess players as brown hairs?
Isn't this kind of questions stupid?
07 Nov 08
Originally posted by FabianFnasPersonally I think that both in chess and in physical sports sexes should not be seperate even though men are at an advantage in both. There shouldn't be a seperation because it's rather arbitrary.
Yes, you're right. We cannot draw any gender specific conclusion of the facts mentionned. Silly me. Sorry.
The original question is interesting in another aspect:
In muscle intensive sports there is humhum for men, and humhum for women. Why? The difference of muscle mass of gender reason. But still, there are lots of women that are stronger than me ...[text shortened]... men that "For being a woman you are quite good!" And rarely she takes this as a compliment.
- Joined
- 20 Jan 07
- Moves
- 24366
07 Nov 08
Originally posted by Tsekos the punkAny one of the Polgar sisters could play the top 30 players on this site in a simul and come out with a pretty comprehesive plus score. I'd say that answers your question pretty well!
Do you think that women can make as good chess players as men?
What's your opinion?
07 Nov 08
Originally posted by KazetNagorraPlease don't misconstrue what I'm about to ask as being critical. I'm simply trying to understand. Are you saying that men are more likely to be great players because there are not as many brilliant female players? Or, are you saying that a great player is more likely to be a man? Not trying to nitpick, but there's a big difference between the two ideas.
Actually, no. While there is no reason why a woman can't become world champion, it's a fact that there are not as many brilliant women as there are men, so men are more likely to be great chess players, which agrees with empirical data. Men are also more likely than women to be really stupid, but that doesn't affect chess. (for "proof", visit Wikipedia)
07 Nov 08
Originally posted by FleabittenWhat I'm saying is that the IQ distrubution has larger standard deviation for men than for women (the mean is about the same), and presumably chess skill correlates with IQ.
Please don't misconstrue what I'm about to ask as being critical. I'm simply trying to understand. Are you saying that men are more likely to be great players because there are not as many brilliant female players? Or, are you saying that a great player is more likely to be a man? Not trying to nitpick, but there's a big difference between the two ideas.
07 Nov 08
Chess Jester weighs in 2 cents:
With the rising equality of women within the last 100 years, we are seeing that they are in-fact intellectual equals, and with their newfound empowerment can become superiors.
As generations of people come and go, barriers of race and gender are slowly eroded as society becomes more progressive.
This brings more women into a mindset of equality and empowerment.
I predict we will see more and more women playing and dominating on the chessboard. I welcome this and say, ABOUT TIME!
07 Nov 08
Originally posted by PalynkaWhere's the evidence?
Where's the evidence?
And do you really think that IQ is the only determinant? If not, then why is the standard deviation of the distribution of these other determinants dominated by the one of IQ?
I don't have any, but judging from experience chess players tend to be more intelligent than the average Joe the Plumber.
And do you really think that IQ is the only determinant? If not, then why is the standard deviation of the distribution of these other determinants dominated by the one of IQ?
It's probably the main determinant, even though IQ is quite a vague term. On your latter point: it doesn't have to, but that seems to comply with empirical evidence.
07 Nov 08
Originally posted by Tsekos the punkGenerally speaking, NO. The reason for this has less to do with intellect, and more to do with interest... As I've said before, a much smaller percentage of Women take an interest in chess than men, until that changes, men will generally rule chess.
Do you think that women can make as good chess players as men?
What's your opinion?
😏
07 Nov 08
Originally posted by bill718A good point. But why do you suppose less women take interest? Nature or nurture?
Generally speaking, NO. The reason for this has less to do with intellect, and more to do with interest... As I've said before, a much smaller percentage of Women take an interest in chess than men, until that changes, men will generally rule chess.
😏
07 Nov 08
Originally posted by PalynkaMay I quote the first posting:
Again Fabian sprinkles us with bad examples to try to prove his point.
"Do you think that women can make as good chess players as men?
What's your opinion?"
I repeat one part of the first posting: "What's your opinion?"
Well, this is my opinion. If you ask for proofs, then you should give proofs yourself. But no proofs are asked for, only opinions. Right?
Perhaps this is a culture thing. In my (sub-)culture we believe in equality of the sexes.